I was watching the Djoker's body language in the third set. I'd say by about 3-4, he expected to lose. The sheer weight of the support for Andy was too much. He almost looked like it would be rude to win. Don't get me wrong, Andy deserved to win, but the partisan crowd was a HUGE factor.

But surely Djokovic is prepared for that, i don't remember partisan support ever affecting Andy at Roland Garros playing Gasquet amid jeers and boos etc. In my mind watching the match again, they were respectful towards Novak apart from the odd boo when he was arguing with the umpire, and a pro Andy crowd does not explain how Novak blew a 4-2 lead in a set twice.

I am of the opinion that the crowd was a huge factor yes, in lifting Andy not making Novak's life miserable.

But surely Djokovic is prepared for that, i don't remember partisan support ever affecting Andy at Roland Garros playing Gasquet amid jeers and boos etc. In my mind watching the match again, they were respectful towards Novak apart from the odd boo when he was arguing with the umpire, and a pro Andy crowd does not explain how Novak blew a 4-2 lead in a set twice.

I am of the opinion that the crowd was a huge factor yes, in lifting Andy not making Novak's life miserable.

That's how I see it too. The crowd did lift Andy, no doubt, but while not being supported might not have helped Djokovic (it didn't at the Olympics either, in that semi you could clearly see he hated the support Andy got) that isn't why Djokovic lost.

Djokovic wasn't unhappy at all when Andy lost those three championship points. Listen to Jonathan Overend on the subject. He said Djokovic was smirking to parts of the crowd, thinking he'd got back in and was about to win in five. JO's exact words were, 'If Djokovic had a cat he'd be stroking it'.

Andy seemed to get it together after that. He seemed to me to really relax in that last rally. He slammed the door in Djokovic's face and Djokovic netted the backhand. The rest is history.

I take your point. I was just trying to put myself in Novak's position. Like I say, it would have felt, to me, almost rude to win. Especially as Andy is a friend. But I'm not a hard-as-nails, world number one tennis player. So perhaps I got it wrong.

He said Djokovic was smirking to parts of the crowd, thinking he'd got back in and was about to win in five.

I firmly believe Novak would have won in 5 if Andy hadn't won that game. He was tiring and Djokovic looked relatively fresh (he goes forever). When you consider that, on one of the break points, Andy hit the back edge of the baseline, it shows you what a knife edge the match was on.

Firstly, Jelena is going to concern herself with Novak. He is her boyfriend. Even under normal circumstances she can look like Bambi during his matches, so watching him try to fight with Andy in that way must have been tough. Maybe she can relate to what Kim has been through over the years, especially at Wimbledon.

The other thought I had, based on reading some of the daft comment beneath the piece, was that the crowd was not unfair. They had a bit of a go at Djokovic when he wanted Lahyani to step in on a call he didn't agree with, when he didn't have any challenges left, but other than that they were very fair, if pro-Andy, and quite right too. They didn't cheer double faults, didn't boo Novak without some reason.

It's amusing to me to read comments from people suggesting that crowds never used to behave like that at Wimbledon, it was polite and quiet etc, in the past. What do these people think it is, a garden party where a bit of tennis is played on the side?

To my mind Wimbledon was brilliant on Sunday. Andy won, which helps, but also, for the first time it felt like one of the other slams, a proper sporting event where it is fine for the host country to support their own players, providing they are also respectful to others. It's the first time I can remember a crowd really getting behind Andy, or any Brit for that matter. It's the first time I can remember hearing a crowd chant a player's name, even during the match. It's also the first time I can remember people in the Royal Box getting as in to it as everyone else. It was a wonderful spectacle to see.

While we're talking about the crowd, did anyone else hear clapping from the commentary box at the end of the match on the BBC's coverage?

The most laughable complaints about the crowd were the Federer fans, who conveniently forget the support Federer usually gets there - even against Andy!

But when the crowd, god forbid, actually support their home player, the Federer fans complain bitterly.

This tweet wound me up no end during the semi-final:

ria ‏@_Alria 5 Jul Hate how some people generalize 'Brits' just based on the biased Wimby crowd. Not all of us are assholes!

---

Apparently we're arseholes for daring to cheer on our favourite player. The hypocrisy is staggering.

I was watching the Djoker's body language in the third set. I'd say by about 3-4, he expected to lose. The sheer weight of the support for Andy was too much. He almost looked like it would be rude to win. Don't get me wrong, Andy deserved to win, but the partisan crowd was a HUGE factor.

This was predicted before the match to tip the scales in Andy's favour. I think it definitely did. He revels off atmosphere like that. His best performances have all come with the crowd roaring him on. Same for many of the Brits, actually.

For example, look at the first point of the game at 4-4 (4:50 mins on here), does that look like a fully committed, confident man who knows he's going to fight back?

For this point in particular, I think the body language was actually more to do with having yet a commanding lead slip for the second set in a row (and then failed to break back despite having several chances).

I firmly believe Novak would have won in 5 if Andy hadn't won that game. He was tiring and Djokovic looked relatively fresh (he goes forever). When you consider that, on one of the break points, Andy hit the back edge of the baseline, it shows you what a knife edge the match was on.

At the same time you've really got to hand it to Andy - how utterly fearless he was on those break points. That forehand on the third break point was huge.

Djokovic wasn't unhappy at all when Andy lost those three championship points. Listen to Jonathan Overend on the subject. He said Djokovic was smirking to parts of the crowd, thinking he'd got back in and was about to win in five. JO's exact words were, 'If Djokovic had a cat he'd be stroking it'.

What he actually said was "he's smiling like a Bond villain, if he'd a cat he'd be stroking it. " I also loved the comment on the challenge on Andy's swerve at Championship point. " it can't be - we can't have Hawkeye winning Wimbledon"

What he actually said was "he's smiling like a Bond villain, if he'd a cat he'd be stroking it. " I also loved the comment on the challenge on Andy's swerve at Championship point. " it can't be - we can't have Hawkeye winning Wimbledon"

I really like Overend. I always felt he was an early supporter of Andy's but not sycophantic. If Andy was playing badly, JO would say so. It's a shame he's given up commentating.

How my heart bleeds, not. What if this match had been played in Serbia with everyone roaring Djokovic on? I don't think Andy would have complained, or Kim either, in fact it might well have got him fired up, so what happened to Djokovic's great mental strength? This is merely a feeble excuse for his loss. Djoko was certainly all smiles the next day at the inaugural dinner of his Foundation in London which was crawling with A list celebs.

I firmly believe Novak would have won in 5 if Andy hadn't won that game. He was tiring and Djokovic looked relatively fresh (he goes forever). When you consider that, on one of the break points, Andy hit the back edge of the baseline, it shows you what a knife edge the match was on.

Please - I don't want to be reminded of that just yet! I had no doubt Djokovic would have gone on to win had he taken that set, and Andy said afterwards that he was mentally spent by that point, so Djoko could well have raced through these next two. What the repercussions would have been I hate to think because I've a feeling all the extra support he gained last year after losing to Federer would have vanished, such is the fickleness of the general public and the media, especially where he's concerned, not to mention the psychological effect losing would have had on him.

I firmly believe Novak would have won in 5 if Andy hadn't won that game. He was tiring and Djokovic looked relatively fresh (he goes forever). When you consider that, on one of the break points, Andy hit the back edge of the baseline, it shows you what a knife edge the match was on.

I've wondered about that myself. Andy has said the same thing - it looked at the time that he was putting absolutely all he had into getting over the line, which, at 2-0, 5-4 is exactly right. I think if Djokovic had broken for 5-5 he would certainly have taken set 3 thereby applying real pressure. I still think, though that Andy would have had time to regroup between sets 4 and 5. Bearing in mind that Djokovic would have faced some tight moments himself, I'm not sure that the outcome was at all certain.

Please - I don't want to be reminded of that just yet! I had no doubt Djokovic would have gone on to win had he taken that set, and Andy said afterwards that he was mentally spent by that point, so Djoko could well have raced through these next two. What the repercussions would have been I hate to think because I've a feeling all the extra support he gained last year after losing to Federer would have vanished, such is the fickleness of the general public and the media, especially where he's concerned, not to mention the psychological effect losing would have had on him.

Aileen ( and others), you really should let this go. Andy won, Novak lost. Yes, things might have turned out different in many ways for either player, but Andy won in straight sets in a very intense and exciting game. We should rejoice, and stop second-guessing alternative scenarios.

Aileen ( and others), you really should let this go. Andy won, Novak lost. Yes, things might have turned out different in many ways for either player, but Andy won in straight sets in a very intense and exciting game. We should rejoice, and stop second-guessing alternative scenarios.

Firstly, Jelena is going to concern herself with Novak. He is her boyfriend. Even under normal circumstances she can look like Bambi during his matches, so watching him try to fight with Andy in that way must have been tough. Maybe she can relate to what Kim has been through over the years, especially at Wimbledon.

The other thought I had, based on reading some of the daft comment beneath the piece, was that the crowd was not unfair. They had a bit of a go at Djokovic when he wanted Lahyani to step in on a call he didn't agree with, when he didn't have any challenges left, but other than that they were very fair, if pro-Andy, and quite right too. They didn't cheer double faults, didn't boo Novak without some reason.

It's amusing to me to read comments from people suggesting that crowds never used to behave like that at Wimbledon, it was polite and quiet etc, in the past. What do these people think it is, a garden party where a bit of tennis is played on the side?

To my mind Wimbledon was brilliant on Sunday. Andy won, which helps, but also, for the first time it felt like one of the other slams, a proper sporting event where it is fine for the host country to support their own players, providing they are also respectful to others. It's the first time I can remember a crowd really getting behind Andy, or any Brit for that matter. It's the first time I can remember hearing a crowd chant a player's name, even during the match. It's also the first time I can remember people in the Royal Box getting as in to it as everyone else. It was a wonderful spectacle to see.

While we're talking about the crowd, did anyone else hear clapping from the commentary box at the end of the match on the BBC's coverage?